Wikiversity talk:Verifiability
From Wikiversity
[edit] Votes
Pro see commments Oliver 20:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Contra -- sebmol ? 12:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)- Pro Mirwin 13:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comments
- It might be worth combining Verifiability and the Reliable Sources policy into one document to ensure the reader does not miss the link off to another page. The second point is we should have a way of citing published sources – i.e. books and citing research papers separately to ensure the reader knows that this might not be absolute fact. Oliver 20:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- We need to develop our content first, create our own precedents and derive best practices from that. This policy is highly premature. -- sebmol ? 12:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oliver makes good points, I would like to associate myself with his remarks. Further, this policy is a good first cut tailoring policy that works well for Wikipedia to Wikiversities unique requirements. Yes, I agree we need to derive our own best practices and they should be rolled back into existing policy. Which means we need existing policy. Mirwin 13:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Limits?
I think it is important that this policy include limits—there are certainly contexts in which verifiability is not critical in Wikiversity. In particular I'm thinking of contexts in which new studies are ongoing at Wikiversity. The only way to "verify" such a thing may be to undertake the same experiment, or to have access to the same materials (such as the famous Psychologist in the example given). In certain contexts, this should not be discouraged at Wikiversity, though in other contexts (where something is being taught as absolute fact as to what is or what happened), it may be very important that everything be verifiable. I must say I feel somewhat like Sebmol that this policy is premature, though I do think that something along these lines would be important. I just think it needs to be qualified more. The Jade Knight 04:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
